Just now, Bebe1980 said:

What about if you just compare the first 75 (223-148) games of Lamps for Chelsea with the first 75 games of Mount for Chelsea ?

If you want to do that feel free ! The data is all freely available on the internet 🙂 

The numbers in that twitter table are lifted from a Matt Law article in the Daily Telegraph, and I'm surprised he's using a comparison like this, that is quite full of holes. Quite sloppy journalism. albeit it makes for a nice puff piece for Mount.

If Mount wants to be a Chelsea legend like Lampard, then (1) he has to sign a new contract (2) he'll  have to step up his performances to ensure he gets in the starting XI (3) he'll need to increase his level of G/A contribution against teams that aren't in the bottom six. 

Personally I hope he does all three of those, as if he does it should mean that Chelsea will be doing really well !

The Shed End forum in 2025

”I can’t believe we let a player of Mounts quality run down his contract and join a direct rival for 70m. We should have just given him what he wanted, he was POTS twice out of the 4 years he was in the first team, one of our best players and proper Chels!

we always do this with our better players, it’s gross mismanagement” 

 

Again I`m amazed at Chelsea fans going out of their way to denigrate Mount and his achievements and efforts for the club. If you think we should sell him, fine, if you tihnk he doesnt deserve to play at the moment, understandable. But to put so much time and effort into proving he just isnt very good amazes me, no other clubs fans would do this, its pathetic.

If it was me doing a write up on Mount, I wouldn't compare him to Lampard or Gerrard, I'd compare him to Foden and Saka.

They are all at a similar stage of their career, all English, all Academy products, playing in PL for one club, and broadly playing in similar positions in their respective teams, which are all "Big Six" clubs.

If you want to use the data set for league games, as Matt law has done, then Foden has 33 goals in 121 appearances, Saka 27 in 124, and Mount 27 in 128, so you can make a strong case that they are all similarly influential, and if it is accepted that Foden and Saka are vital to the futures of Arsenal and City (I doubt you would find many people to argue against that), then you can make a similar inference for Mount/Chelsea. This was the crux of his article after all ... 

 

 

Pay up. 

Quote

 

A fee of between £60-70million could well be enough to prise Mason Mount away from #Chelsea, as Newcastle United look to join the race.

(@footyinsider247)

— Chels HQ ⭐️⭐️ (@Chels_HQ) March 15, 2023

 

 

2 hours ago, dkw said:

Again I`m amazed at Chelsea fans going out of their way to denigrate Mount and his achievements and efforts for the club. If you think we should sell him, fine, if you tihnk he doesnt deserve to play at the moment, understandable. But to put so much time and effort into proving he just isnt very good amazes me, no other clubs fans would do this, its pathetic.

Really sad to see how quickly the fans have turned on one of their own especially when it's the first bad long spell he's had after 2 good years. 

2 hours ago, dkw said:

Again I`m amazed at Chelsea fans going out of their way to denigrate Mount and his achievements and efforts for the club. If you think we should sell him, fine, if you tihnk he doesnt deserve to play at the moment, understandable. But to put so much time and effort into proving he just isnt very good amazes me, no other clubs fans would do this, its pathetic.

Did you see what MUFC fans did to Maguire?

3 hours ago, Remodez said:

Really sad to see how quickly the fans have turned on one of their own especially when it's the first bad long spell he's had after 2 good years. 

I feel it’s his agent & PR team doing a bad job by releasing bits in the press every other day, and linking him to other team while their client is having a poor season. Contrast his situation with Rashford who until Jan was in the last 6mth of his contract, but I can’t remember him trying to put pressure on their board in the press. He is actually in the same boat with Mason, with Utd only exercising the extra yr option in his contract. You would think with him having a brilliant season they would be linking him every top club in Europe to try and wrangle the biggest contract they can, but there hasn’t been anything in the press. 
If Mount was having a brilliant season, this same people that have turned against him would have started a campaign to pay him what he is asking for. I don’t support any of the abuse but it must be annoying to have his people constantly keep linking him with moves away, when the board has offered him an improved contract despite his poor performances.

 

I think he will move on.

6 hours ago, Blueboys said:

The Shed End forum in 2025

”I can’t believe we let a player of Mounts quality run down his contract and join a direct rival for 70m. We should have just given him what he wanted, he was POTS twice out of the 4 years he was in the first team, one of our best players and proper Chels!

we always do this with our better players, it’s gross mismanagement” 

 

Or he'll go there still struggle to recreate his best self and we'd look back thinking we absolutely made the right call. Like we did with a certain other two times player of the year who was apparently going to terrorise us for a decade.

Or he signs a new deal and can't get back to his best form (ala Oscar) and the same people saying we should give him a new deal because he's Mason Mount start bashing the board for lacking foresight.

If, buts and maybes are a two way street.

3 hours ago, Remodez said:

Really sad to see how quickly the fans have turned on one of their own especially when it's the first bad long spell he's had after 2 good years. 

This is exactly what I mean when I say people are trying to group people constructively criticising him in with the group of idiots abusing him.

People have every right to be concerned with a near season and a half of bad form.

15 minutes ago, Argo said:

Like we did with a certain other two times player of the year who was apparently going to terrorise us for a decade.

I absolutely believe if we had an attacking coach instead of Mourinho, he would have carried on his form and remain our best player. He was brilliant.

I’m not surprised he couldn’t recapture his form at Man United, they were in a mess and of course Mourinho went there as well.

8 minutes ago, dansubrosa said:

I absolutely believe if we had an attacking coach instead of Mourinho, he would have carried on his form and remain our best player. He was brilliant.

I’m not surprised he couldn’t recapture his form at Man United, they were in a mess and of course Mourinho went there as well.

We were a mess for most of Mata's time here aswell (the UCL win covered up just how bad we were in the league that year).

That's partly why he became so loved so quickly because he was performing despite everything else going on around him.

mata was amazing in 12/13 campaign

don't forget that 

I always liked Mata, very surprised we got rid of him.

I don't really like Mount as a player - bit over-rated imho, and seems like we have better options now.

Some players are ok sitting on the bench or being paid less than others some aren't - I think he'd be better at a smaller club.

12 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

If it was me doing a write up on Mount, I wouldn't compare him to Lampard or Gerrard, I'd compare him to Foden and Saka.

They are all at a similar stage of their career, all English, all Academy products, playing in PL for one club, and broadly playing in similar positions in their respective teams, which are all "Big Six" clubs.

If you want to use the data set for league games, as Matt law has done, then Foden has 33 goals in 121 appearances, Saka 27 in 124, and Mount 27 in 128, so you can make a strong case that they are all similarly influential, and if it is accepted that Foden and Saka are vital to the futures of Arsenal and City (I doubt you would find many people to argue against that), then you can make a similar inference for Mount/Chelsea. This was the crux of his article after all ... 

 

 

I don't see Foden as vital to City's future.

Mount is an unusual player, in my opinion. He is one of those guys that may well be valuable to the team but are not individually brilliant. He makes some fantastic passes, gets in good positions but shooting is poor, is not that fast and doesn't defend. If you want him in the midfield in an oldstyle chelsea classic 4 3 3 then he isn't the kind of midfielder that Lampard or Ballack or Essien were. On the other hand Gallagher reminds me of Lampard quite a bit. Nor is Mount an out and out wide player although that is where he is mostly played for both Chelsea and England.  

He is mostly an attacking link up player

I think in some ways he reminds me more of Malouda than anyone else except less muscular.

My own feeling is that if mudryck and chukwuemeka come on he will struggle to start

13 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

If it was me doing a write up on Mount, I wouldn't compare him to Lampard or Gerrard, I'd compare him to Foden and Saka.

They are all at a similar stage of their career, all English, all Academy products, playing in PL for one club, and broadly playing in similar positions in their respective teams, which are all "Big Six" clubs.

If you want to use the data set for league games, as Matt law has done, then Foden has 33 goals in 121 appearances, Saka 27 in 124, and Mount 27 in 128, so you can make a strong case that they are all similarly influential, and if it is accepted that Foden and Saka are vital to the futures of Arsenal and City (I doubt you would find many people to argue against that), then you can make a similar inference for Mount/Chelsea. This was the crux of his article after all ... 

 

 

Saka is 3 years younger than Mount, and Foden is 2 years younger than him. Mount bloomed early due to Lampard playing him frequently but those two have a higher ceiling in my opinion, particulary Saka who I think will be absolutely world class barring serious injury.

Such a shame that a lot of Chelsea fans doesn't appreciate the like of Mount and Gallagher. Those two imo are proof how good our academy truly is. 

People will say Reece is a better proof. If our academy can produce physical monster as Reece year in year out, then our head of academy must be bald on a wheel chair. 

Our academy is very good. Roman invested heavily on it and it shows. I think Chelsea fans in general appreciate players like Mount and Gallagher.

Whether a young player fits or is good enough for the first team is another question completely. Looking at the very top teams in the world and you see handful of starters in those teams coming from their respective academies. 

The academy has succeeded if we manage to get that player to the first team or we can sell him on for a good transfer fee. Not everyone will fit the first team. 

Mount for me is a player we need to keep hold of. I don't even feel I have to elaborate on that point.

6 hours ago, Drogba1 said:

Saka is 3 years younger than Mount, and Foden is 2 years younger than him. Mount bloomed early due to Lampard playing him frequently but those two have a higher ceiling in my opinion, particulary Saka who I think will be absolutely world class barring serious injury.

That's true, but in terms of their PL experience they are at an almost identical stage.

As per our club "Loan Army" model, Mount had two years on loan at Vitesse and Derby, whereas City/Arsenal elected to keep Saka and Foden around and ease them into the first team. I think that is the main difference.

Foden probably has the highest ceiling, if he can keep his head straight and control his mum LOL.

I'm not saying it is a perfect comparison, but it is better in my opinion than comparing Mount to Lampard and Gerrard from a different era. I checked how Mount's 128 games broke down positionally, and he had 34 appearances as a midfielder and 94 in the front three/four, so again that suggests Foden/Saka is a better compare.

Mount has 5 goals and 3 assists in the 34, and 22/21 in the 94 if anyone is interested. 

Edited March 16, 20233 yr by Sexyfootball

7 hours ago, ozboy said:

Mount is an unusual player, in my opinion. He is one of those guys that may well be valuable to the team but are not individually brilliant. He makes some fantastic passes, gets in good positions but shooting is poor, is not that fast and doesn't defend. If you want him in the midfield in an oldstyle chelsea classic 4 3 3 then he isn't the kind of midfielder that Lampard or Ballack or Essien were. On the other hand Gallagher reminds me of Lampard quite a bit. Nor is Mount an out and out wide player although that is where he is mostly played for both Chelsea and England.  

He is mostly an attacking link up player

I think in some ways he reminds me more of Malouda than anyone else except less muscular.

My own feeling is that if mudryck and chukwuemeka come on he will struggle to start

Mount doesn't defend? Have i been watching a different player to you for the last 4 years?

44 minutes ago, RIP Mourinho said:

Mount doesn't defend? Have i been watching a different player to you for the last 4 years?

He used to be amazing at tracking back. Too bad he stopped doing it as much after winning the CL. His work rate has gone downhill over time although no doubt that is mostly because he played way too many games in general and looked tired for large parts of the previous season.

9 hours ago, ozboy said:

Mount is an unusual player, in my opinion. He is one of those guys that may well be valuable to the team but are not individually brilliant. He makes some fantastic passes, gets in good positions but shooting is poor, is not that fast and doesn't defend. If you want him in the midfield in an oldstyle chelsea classic 4 3 3 then he isn't the kind of midfielder that Lampard or Ballack or Essien were. On the other hand Gallagher reminds me of Lampard quite a bit. Nor is Mount an out and out wide player although that is where he is mostly played for both Chelsea and England.  

He is mostly an attacking link up player

I think in some ways he reminds me more of Malouda than anyone else except less muscular.

My own feeling is that if mudryck and chukwuemeka come on he will struggle to start

 

This pretty much sums up my thoughts, he's good at everything and not really exceptional at anything. He's a good team player to have and I think they are important to the squad.

I want him to stay but the fact we haven't buckled to his demands shows they think hes not irreplaceable. I agree with him asking for money as its his big contract but its easier to replace Mason Mount than it is to replace someone like Reece James. He's one of the top players in his position and you pay him that.

Mount does not get into the City or Arsenal starting 11 right now, James does. When you have owners now who spend silly amounts of money and try dodge FFP restrictions we are not gonna give someone big wages who potentially may not start week in week out.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 16, 20233 yr by Sheva

4 hours ago, evissy said:

Mount for me is a player we need to keep hold of. I don't even feel I have to elaborate on that point.

For all intensive purposes, the club is trying to keep Mount. 

2 hours ago, reparto corse said:

He used to be amazing at tracking back. Too bad he stopped doing it as much after winning the CL. His work rate has gone downhill over time although no doubt that is mostly because he played way too many games in general and looked tired for large parts of the previous season.

Its once again writing off the past 4/5 years because of the last 6 months though. Say he's burnt out by all means but claiming he doesn't defend when his work rate was one of the best in the league and a large reason he was so highly regarded is bizarre revisionism.